linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v2] dmaengine: ste_dma40: fix error return code in d40

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 30 May 2013 21:29:16 +0300
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com>
Cc:	srinidhi.kasagar@...ricsson.com,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn,
	linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Devicetree Discuss <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2] dmaengine: ste_dma40: fix error return code in d40_probe()

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com> wrote:
> In many of the error handling case, the return value 'ret' not set
> and 0 will be return from d40_probe() even if error, but we should
> return a negative error code instead in those error handling case.
> This patch fixed them, and also removed useless variable 'err'.

Hold on, please.

> --- a/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c

> @@ -3619,6 +3618,7 @@ static int __init d40_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>                 if (IS_ERR(base->lcpa_regulator)) {
>                         d40_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get lcpa_regulator\n");
>                         base->lcpa_regulator = NULL;
> +                       ret = PTR_ERR(base->lcpa_regulator);

Is it really what we want?

I thixh you may remove that NULL assignment.


>                         goto failure;
>                 }
>

> @@ -3647,8 +3647,8 @@ static int __init d40_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         d40_hw_init(base);
>
>         if (np) {
> -               err = of_dma_controller_register(np, d40_xlate, NULL);
> -               if (err && err != -ENODEV)
> +               ret = of_dma_controller_register(np, d40_xlate, NULL);
> +               if (ret && ret != -ENODEV)

>From the discussion of dw_dmac I remember we decide that ENODEV check
is redundant.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/